The RPG Maker Resource Kit

Other Game Creation => Program Troubleshooting => Topic started by: neverused on December 23, 2007, 04:13:44 PM

Title: bit depth
Post by: neverused on December 23, 2007, 04:13:44 PM
I'm sorry if this is a stupid question and I did a quick search, but I didn't find an answer.  What I need to know is, how can I change the bit depth of a png?  The simpler the method the better please.  Thanks
Title: Re: bit depth
Post by: HolyQuebec on December 23, 2007, 10:57:34 PM
simplier go into paint,open the picture.
as soon you're in, simply do ''save as'' and change the format.
Simple, no?
add [RESOLVED] to the topic's title.
Title: Re: bit depth
Post by: neverused on December 24, 2007, 12:04:48 AM
the only problem is that I'm using RPG Maker 2003 and near as I can tell, it only accepts 8 bit depth, and paint only lets you save something as low as 16 bit

unless I'm wrong about RPG Maker 2003, which is possible since I've only been trying it since friday and I'm totally new to all of this
Title: Re: bit depth
Post by: HolyQuebec on December 24, 2007, 02:17:50 AM
listen, I don't know the exact format,but try some of them.
that'll take you max 5 mins and it's gonna work.
Title: Re: bit depth
Post by: &&&&&&&&&&&&& on December 24, 2007, 02:58:02 AM
Save it as a 256 colour bitmap.
Title: Re: bit depth
Post by: HolyQuebec on December 24, 2007, 03:07:58 AM
kay thx haha. I didn't feel like trying them out <.<

Now,add [Resolved] to teh topic doood 8)
Title: Re: bit depth
Post by: neverused on December 26, 2007, 05:52:25 AM
thank you all, I'll give it a try right now
Title: Re: bit depth
Post by: Zeriab on December 26, 2007, 01:36:53 PM
Wait with adding the [RESOLVED] tag until the topic actually is resolved.
When it is resolved you can add the tag by editing your first post ^_^

@HolyQuebec:
When you tell people to add the [RESOLVED] tag, say that they should add it if they solved their problem. That slight chance in what you are telling people will make me happy ;)
Title: Re: bit depth
Post by: HolyQuebec on December 26, 2007, 04:07:34 PM
ya ur right.
i'll remember ;)
Title: Re: bit depth
Post by: Unreliable on December 26, 2007, 06:07:06 PM
Holy Quebec seems to be quite cocky... I've seen him go around ordering people to add resolved to their topic just because he gave them a (half-assed) potential fix for their problem...
Title: Re: bit depth
Post by: HolyQuebec on December 26, 2007, 09:34:36 PM
i'm not cocky AT ALL. i asked they're questions. it's like a yes or no questions.
they add *resolved*

the other one above me made me realise that I shouldn't say that because it might not be resolved. and I understood and shall not make the same ''mistake'' again.

i'm just trying to get everything done lol i'm not cocky at all. in fact, I like helping.

mind your own buisness? this is a ''bit depth'' topic, not a ''I Find HolyQuebec Cocky''
Title: Re: bit depth
Post by: Unreliable on December 27, 2007, 04:22:17 AM
I'm sorry I offended you, I didn't realize you were so sensitive about your cockyness.

Also back to the topic at hand, photoshop has an option to change to color depth of an image.---That's only if Fredrick II's solution didn't work, which looks sound enough to work anyway. But just in case.
Title: Re: bit depth
Post by: HolyQuebec on December 27, 2007, 05:48:48 AM
i'm not cocky.
oh well you said sry idc nemore.
Title: Re: bit depth
Post by: Brady on December 27, 2007, 08:15:50 PM
I would only argue about your cockiness, not cockyness.....see, I'm not cocky, just picky....
(Just so HolyQuebec has somethin' to argue back with ;))
Title: Re: bit depth
Post by: Unreliable on December 28, 2007, 12:09:11 AM
>_> We're off that subject now.
Title: Re: bit depth
Post by: Brady on December 28, 2007, 04:22:40 PM
If i cared i wouldn't have said it, eh?  :-\
Title: Re: bit depth
Post by: Unreliable on December 28, 2007, 05:19:40 PM
Quote from: Brady on December 28, 2007, 04:22:40 PM
If i cared i wouldn't have said it, eh?  :-\
This isn't a matter of caring it's a matter of shutting up as we are not talking about it, you're further pushing this thread off it's topic of conversation, thanks to your useless post.
Title: Re: bit depth
Post by: Brady on December 29, 2007, 01:43:49 AM
I obviously can't shut up t the right time and thusly drag topic further off post, but maybe you could listen to your own advice and quit aggravating the situation by further posting about it?  It'd make sense, eh?

And for the record, my 'useless post' about your bad spelling was in reply to your equally useless post about HolyQuebecs posting habits....your spelling and his tendencies don't matter, but annoy both of us respectively so that would further the fact that you're helping knock this thread off topic.

It takes two to tango, baby!  Wanna dance?  ;D
Title: Re: bit depth
Post by: Unreliable on December 29, 2007, 05:02:57 AM
Quote from: Brady on December 29, 2007, 01:43:49 AM
I obviously can't shut up t the right time and thusly drag topic further off post, but maybe you could listen to your own advice and quit aggravating the situation by further posting about it?  It'd make sense, eh?

And for the record, my 'useless post' about your bad spelling was in reply to your equally useless post about HolyQuebecs posting habits....your spelling and his tendencies don't matter, but annoy both of us respectively so that would further the fact that you're helping knock this thread off topic.

It takes two to tango, baby!  Wanna dance?  ;D

I spelled a word wrong, it annoyed no one, you simply argued with me about it because you're an insufferable retard, but that's neither here nor there... The point of my more or less condescending post was to let you know that whether or not you cared didnt matter, and the fact that it was off-topic was apparent to probably everyone, you however decided to post, siding with the generally unintelligent HolyQuebec, in hopes to get a rise out of me, and now you're left with me acting completely unpleasant and potentially pretentious and to avoid an awful aliteration, I'll change the subject. Oh, and I don't dance, I much rather watch you squirm in an attempt to e-own me or whatever, dancing isn't my cup of tea. ;D
Title: Re: bit depth
Post by: Brady on December 29, 2007, 04:41:52 PM
Quote from: RyuGigas on December 29, 2007, 05:02:57 AM
I spelled a word wrong, it annoyed no one, you simply argued with me about it because you're an insufferable retard, but that's neither here nor there... The point of my more or less condescending post was to let you know that whether or not you cared didnt matter, and the fact that it was off-topic was apparent to probably everyone, you however decided to post, siding with the generally unintelligent HolyQuebec, in hopes to get a rise out of me, and now you're left with me acting completely unpleasant and potentially pretentious and to avoid an awful aliteration, I'll change the subject. Oh, and I don't dance, I much rather watch you squirm in an attempt to e-own me or whatever, dancing isn't my cup of tea. ;D

You say those things almost as if i'm worse than you?  You've slated me and HolyQuebec a number of times now, very nastily as well, in fact, to the point that i'd ban someone if i was a mod, and Quebec did nothing, i commented on your spelling error....and i get told i'm unpleasant....that's another example of your 'pot calling the kettle black' as it were.  I'm not tryin' to eown you or anythin' here.  I don't need to.  I'm being civilised about this, you're throwing names and insults around....we all know who the kid is here, so.......*dances*  :blizj:
Title: Re: bit depth
Post by: Unreliable on December 29, 2007, 06:08:20 PM
Quote from: Brady on December 29, 2007, 04:41:52 PM
Quote from: RyuGigas on December 29, 2007, 05:02:57 AM
I spelled a word wrong, it annoyed no one, you simply argued with me about it because you're an insufferable retard, but that's neither here nor there... The point of my more or less condescending post was to let you know that whether or not you cared didnt matter, and the fact that it was off-topic was apparent to probably everyone, you however decided to post, siding with the generally unintelligent HolyQuebec, in hopes to get a rise out of me, and now you're left with me acting completely unpleasant and potentially pretentious and to avoid an awful aliteration, I'll change the subject. Oh, and I don't dance, I much rather watch you squirm in an attempt to e-own me or whatever, dancing isn't my cup of tea. ;D

You say those things almost as if i'm worse than you?  You've slated me and HolyQuebec a number of times now, very nastily as well, in fact, to the point that i'd ban someone if i was a mod, and Quebec did nothing, i commented on your spelling error....and i get told i'm unpleasant....that's another example of your 'pot calling the kettle black' as it were.  I'm not tryin' to eown you or anythin' here.  I don't need to.  I'm being civilised about this, you're throwing names and insults around....we all know who the kid is here, so.......*dances*  :blizj:

You are worse than me, you randomly chime in and argue with me when something doesn't concern you, and if you had the mind capacity to comprehend my post, you'd realize I said I was acting unpleasant, and to further your "defeat" as it were, I can make pretentious baseless claims too.. "we all know who the kid is here, so.... *dances* :blizj:"

Here's mine... We all know brady does jenkems and enjoys it when he is urinated on. *dances*  ;8
Title: Re: bit depth
Post by: HolyQuebec on December 29, 2007, 08:31:46 PM
stop that ryu.
i was wandering aroung and checked some of your post. why you're such a hater?
Title: Re: bit depth
Post by: Brady on December 29, 2007, 11:26:38 PM
Who knows?  Maybe he's just yet to grow up?  Either way, as fun as the lil' debate was, it's gettin' repetetive now with him just spinning insults and makin' no genuine arguments, so, to quote myself on the other thread:

''chill''  ;)
Title: Re: bit depth
Post by: HolyQuebec on December 29, 2007, 11:27:31 PM
Quote from: Brady on December 29, 2007, 11:26:38 PM
''chill''  ;)

agreed ;)